If Mary was sinless?

[icedtea]

"And made war against the rest of her seed?" So Mary did have other children!
Oops.

Where did she get taken into the desert?
You are grasping at straws here.

 

[Benedicta00]

Umm, we never deny that we read the bible under a premise. But I got news for you- so do you.

Tell me why is your premise that you read the bible under more creditable then the Church's?

And for the recorded, there is no set in stone Revelation is to be interpreted. It can be Israel as well as Mary.

We know that Mary did give birth to the male child, right?

 

[Cyberdyne1]

As far as the Bible as our sole authority. My PERSONAL experience was this.

When I was an unsaved druggie, I managed to get my hands on a New Testament. I started at the beginning and read. I was facinated at what I read and as being raised as a roman catholic, I couldn't understand why there were so many things that contradicted what I learned in church. One of those things was that Jesus had brothers and sisters. I read it, I believed it. I didn't understand at the time, I was stupid and uneducated and didn't know all the "traditions" and "other baggage" that had to go along with the Word to make me a good Christian. I didn't know Greek, Aramic, Hebrew, etc, etc...

For me the answer is simple. If I was a lost sinner stranded on an island, shipwrecked, with no hope of escape, and all I had was one King James Bible, I believe there would be EVERYTHING I needed in that book to lead me to salvation, and an eternity with Jesus Christ.

No veneration of Mary, believing Jesus had brothers and sisters, what it said, I'd believe, just like when I read it from beginning to end with NO church affiliation, no pre-concieved doctrine, no understanding of what it "really" said in Greek, and no teaching from any slanted point of view. I found everything I needed in that book to get me excited about God, to want to meet him personally and to spend my eternity with Jesus.

Jesus said people would stumble over the "simplicity" of the gospel. Believing Mary was sinless, sexless, etc just doesn't help ME at all. And when I picked up that Bible for the very first time and read and understood how I was lost to God and to Jesus, believe me all I cared about at that moment was ME...

 

[Sooner0724]

Mary did that.

14 And there were given to the woman two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the desert unto her place, where she is nourished for a time and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth after the woman, water as it were a river; that he might cause her to be carried away by the river.

16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the river, which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

17 And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

This is too compelling to ignore or write off.

This just demonstrates that you presupposed a belief, before you even read the scripture. You take these few verse,(OUT OF CONTEXT), and then attach your presupposed idea. Reading the entire chapter in full demonstrates the truth the scriptures were giving.

 

[icedtea]

Jesus said I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and end.
The catholic church takes its eyes off Him onto her.

 

[Benedicta00]

"And made war against the rest of her seed?" So Mary did have other children!

Yes and they are US, those who keep the commandments of God- trying reading the rest of the sentence.

Where did she get taken into the desert?
You are grasping at straws here.

No... We know John is a book of symbolism. How does the place in the dessert that kept the face of the serpent from the woman and the earth helping the women by heading off the devil apply to Israel specifically?

 

[icedtea]

And for the recorded, there is no set in stone Revelation is to be interpreted. It can be Israel as well as Mary.

Your other post states it WAS Mary. Now you are waffling.

 

[Benedicta00]

Jesus said I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and end.
The catholic church takes its eyes off Him onto her.

No we do not. This is just your opinion. Sorry you feel that way- sorry you still do not know us well.

 

[icedtea]

Now watch my prophetic powers as I prophecy that the Roman Catholics will spiritualize that part saying that the "other seed" is the Church, while they maintain a literal interpretation that the "woman" is Mary.



:

Anyone want to take that on?

 

[icedtea]

No we do not. This is just your opinion. Sorry you feel that way- sorry you still do not know us well.

Would you like to respond to "And made war against the rest of her seed?" Either Mary had other children, or the "woman" is Israel!

 

[Cyberdyne1]

Would you like to respond to "And made war against the rest of her seed?" Either Mary had other children, or the "woman" is Israel!

Excellent !!!

 

[Benedicta00]

Your other post states it WAS Mary. Now you are waffling.

No, there is no dichotomies here. There is NO either/or, there is the both/and.

It can be seen either way because John has never been infallibly interpreted. But one does not contradict the other.

As a Catholic I am free to read the bible and believe based on what I read but what I can not do is contradict the teaching of the Church when I do and in believing this is a reference to Mary and not specifically to Israel is not contradicting the Church which is the fullness of God’s word.

Look, you asked for scripture and I gave it to you. What more do you want?

Read Genesis 3 15. God said he was going to put enmities between the woman’s seed and the serpents seed. And SHE will crush his head while he lies in wait of HER heel. In the original language.

What more could you want?

 

[thereselittleflower]

In reality, the word used does mean, "blood brothers" and not "cousins". A different word is used for "cousins".

Therefore, the premise of it saying "cousins" is a false premise, and a concoction invvented to try to justify errors.

Really? Are you willing to bet your bank account on your claims? (I am speaking figuatively of course,)



Let's look at one of these situaitons .. I picked one at random.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

​

BRETHERN:

G80
ἀδελφός
adelphos
ad-el-***'
From G1 (as a connective particle) and δελφύςdelphus (the womb); a brother (literally or figuratively) near or remote (much like [H1]): - brother.




​

It is a word used to denote all possible degrees of relationship one can have wth others, including social and spiritual . not just physical.



There is nothing that mandates this word be understood to refer only to those from the same mother as one's self.






Peace

 

[icedtea]

No, there is no dichotomies here. There is NO either/or, there is the both/and.

double talk!

when I do and in believing this is a reference to Mary and not specifically to Israel is not contradicting the Church which is the fullness of God’s word.



What more could you want?

Jesus is the fullness of God's word, not your church!

 

[judaica]

The only post I found so far, was one you already responsed too:

http://www.christianforums.com/t3113818-if-mary-was-sinless.html&page=56

Which was in turn a response to Tall: http://www.christianforums.com/t3113818-if-mary-was-sinless.html&page=42

(As I told Tall, I kinda got in on the tail end of this conversation, so it's very possible I misunderstood your argument. (I only read the link, for whatever I missed))

I responded to your response with an apology if I misunderstood your argument. But I was not really ignoring anything (this thread is really too difficult to follow).

I do want to respond to your response to AWC:

http://www.christianforums.com/t3113818-if-mary-was-sinless.html&page=57

From the link:

But to respond to Judaica's post here:

Okay I see. Well the statement made by TLF is illogical. I don't mean that as a slur against her, it's philosophically illogical. If Mary had to be sinless in order for Christ to be sinless, then we'd have to (to be logically consistent) say the same about Mary's mom and back and back and back til we got to Eve. As I think you've kinda been saying or asking or whatever.


​

Again, Judaica , , you have misunderstood our argument.

Again? Whose "our"?

You are simply ignoring facts inevidence that disprove your assertion.

This is simply unfair, and I resent you saying this. I don't know if Mary remained sinless or not. I don't have a stake in this debate. I am not ignoring facts. As I said, this thread is very hard for me to follow.

If Mary's parent's had to be also sinless, then Mary would not have needed a savior to be sinless.

I don't understand what you're saying here. I understood your original argument to be saying that it was necessary that Mary be sinless in order for Christ to be sinless.

But, we teach Mary needed a savior, that means she could not have NATURALLY inherited an unwounded human nature, a human nature free from the stain of Adam's sin, from her parents. . .
so, nothing illogical about what I said at all, philosophically or otherwise .. .

See above.

You are simply failing to take into accout ALL our argument and what we have presented.

Because, this thread is too freakin long! TLF! Stop accusing me of not taking things into account. I have no agenda in this...no stakes...I just like talking about Mary.

Your argument above is a logical fallacy known as a NON SEQUITUR . . the conclusion simply does not follow

Whatever. If you would like we can start another thread and you can explain your argument to me one on one (relatively speaking) without 70 some odd pages of replies. That would be nice. As for me, I'm out of this thread, it's got me so turned around and confused I'm ready to pull my hair out just trying to keep up.

Judaica

 

[FreeinChrist]

No, there is no dichotomies here. There is NO either/or, there is the both/and.

It can be seen either way because John has never been infallibly interpreted. But one does not contradict the other.

As a Catholic I am free to read the bible and believe based on what I read but what I can not do is contradict the teaching of the Church when I do and in believing this is a reference to Mary and not specifically to Israel is not contradicting the Church which is the fullness of God’s word.

Look, you asked for scripture and I gave it to you. What more do you want?

Read Genesis 3 15. God said he was going to put enmities between the woman’s seed and the serpents seed. And SHE will crush his head while he lies in wait of HER heel. In the original language.

What more could you want?

It is translated "she" in the DouayRheims which is a Catholic Bible. Other Bible do not use "she". The NASB is the most word for word translation and uses "he" as does the KJV and many, mnay others.

 

[icedtea]

Read Genesis 3 15. God said he was going to put enmities between the woman’s seed and the serpents seed.

So the serpent had a physical child. hm

 

[thereselittleflower]

Would you like to respond to "And made war against the rest of her seed?" Either Mary had other children, or the "woman" is Israel!

Spiritually we have become the blood brothers of Christ . . He has given us His blood.

Spiritually this makes us Mary's children as well.



Peace

 

[Benedicta00]

Would you like to respond to "And made war against the rest of her seed?" Either Mary had other children, or the "woman" is Israel!

Oh my goodness are we being selective and subjective or what?

So are you now agreeing this is a reference to Mary and not Israel?

And finished reading the sentence please…

Do you see how you all are? You read just what you want and see just what you want.

He took his place in the sand to wage was on the rest of her seed, Those who keep the commandments of God.

It means all believers are her spiritual children. Satan took his place in the sand to wage war on us, the Christians.

Please stop twisting the verse, at least show some intellectual honestly.

I have never in my life seen anyone use this in such a subjective arbitrary way- to assume this meant the devil went out and attacked her other natural born children.

To what end would he do that?

This doesn’t even make any logical sense!

 

[icedtea]

Do you see how you all are? You read just what you want and see just what you want.

Vice versa.